The smartest kids don't even go to the Ivies

[HSisOverrated]

<p>

False, on several accounts. It is NOT true that 30% of Ivy accepteds are legacies. I mean, think about it. Legacy supposedly only helps if you apply ED.

</p>

<p>Since when? </p>

<p>It’s a KNOWN FACT that the Ivy reserves 30% of its slots for LEGACY! </p>

<p>[Model</a> Minority “Thugs, Feminists and Boom Bap”: The Ivy League and the IIlusion of Accessbility](<a href=“http://modelminority.blogspot.com/2007/12/ivy-leage-and-iilusion-of-accesbility.html]Model”>Model Minority "Thugs, Feminists and Boom Bap": The Ivy League and the IIlusion of Accessbility)</p>

<p>

Ivies fill about 1/2 of their class ED. Are 3/5 of those accepted ED legacies? I don’t think so. I’d set it at more like 10%, or maybe even less. Second of all, you’re assuming here that legacies and URMs CAN’T be brilliant as well… also false.

</p>

<p>I never said that, but you’re missing the point. These people are getting in based on non-academic qualities, something I DO NOT AGREE WITH. Are they brilliant? Perhaps. Do I care? NO. </p>

<p>

Either way, though, URMs make up maybe another 15%.

</p>

<p>Shocking.<br>

Let’s say developmental admits are another 5%; that makes 30%. The other 70% are left to the best and the brightest, or the most interesting, or the most creative.

</p>

<p>Fanboy much? The Ivy League is not about the best or the brightest, it’s about the committed or the prepped. You’ve either been pampered since day one to be an Ivy God (which, sadly, makes up a significant portion of the admits) or you’re a dedicated student with decent scores and decent e.c.</p>

<p>People paint the Ivy League admissions process like it’s the Earth equivalent of heaven, when it’s far far from that. The American college admissions process is nothing but ruthless, superficiality, power, and money. This is doubly so for the Ivy League. Only the most creative/genius will get in with a happy face and a clean report card.</p>